Published on 12, July, 2020
I will start by admitting I'm a bit grumpy as my brain is boiling in the heat (south of England heatwave).
Nevertheless, I am getting rather irritated by people talking about neurodiversity (neurodivergence) on threads without mentioning what the neurodivergence is.
I'm having to assume that they are talking about autism as it's an autism forum but it could be something else (see below).
I feel like this umbrella term becoming a substitute for each individual condition.
Does anyone else feel the same or should I take a cool shower?
NeuroDiversity is everyone. It was created with an Analogy to BioDiverse.
Divergent from what's consisted "Typical" - median or a maths average in society, is the umbrella term for differences in being which have a kind of evolutionary advantage - often at the expense of something which might be 'normal'. However, disabilities are also under this umbrella as things which one cannot just 'will' out of or change.
The problem is most people creating these don't know the history of psychoanalysis, aren't using terminology correctly, and are just trying to garner a bit of attention. A few are genuine and using terms wrong but wish to make a difference somehow.
For instance, OCD is a clinical term relating to a "Typical" neurotype, in that they use the same linguistics, they aren't high scoring on the Monotropism test. It was created as an extreme response to trauma and is something that with years of work can be overcome or kept in a mindful check. An Autistic with a hyper vigilant routine does so for well-being and safety. OCD is a routine facilitating the opposite of well-being and safety.
The motive and outcome are really important when understanding nuances of difference.
But yet, NeuroDivergent is an umbrella term. A company which states they are a neurodiverse company just means they claim to be open to hiring Divergent individuals along with Typical, but doubtful many could actually explain the differences. x